By Tom Fowdy
For the past five years, Myanmar in South East Asia has been one of the world's most politically isolated countries. After a military junta deposed its democratically elected government in early 2021, itself only having been established in 2015, Naypyidaw has largely been shunned by the rest of the world. The country has always been fraught by such chronic instability, with the coup itself having triggered an ongoing brutal civil war along its deep-set political and ethnic fault lines. It is very much perceived as "Asia's failed state."
Thus, for the past half-decade, most of the world has refused to give recognition to the Myanmar military regime, which has sought to "normalise" itself by using civilian clothing and holding elections that are denounced as staged. However, change is underway. Recently, Michael Vance, US assistant secretary of state for intelligence and research, made a decision to visit the South East Asian nation and hold talks with its generals. Although the official excuse for the visit was that Vance was securing the release of a US citizen, the trip undeniably marked a break in five years of American policy in attempting to isolate the regime, with its President Min Aung Hlaing under US sanctions for "crimes against humanity."
Thus, that visit is not a practical one, but a political one, and there is more to it beneath the surface. According to a Council on Foreign Relations article about the trip, "Vance and other U.S. officials have apparently discussed with their Myanmar counterparts the possibility of access to Myanmar's sizable deposits of rare earths," noting that it is one of America's key foreign policy priorities to secure strategic access to these resources, amidst China dominating them and subsequently holding a grip over global supply chains, including military supply chains, of which the CFR piece notes have been "depleted by the Iran War."
Should this surprise us? The answer is no. While the CFR piece subsequently condemns Trump's decision-making here as "disastrous," citing the mounting humanitarian toll and alleged brutality of the status quo in Myanmar, for those who understand Trump's foreign policy, the outcome is to be expected. First of all, the Trump administration's outlook for US relations with the rest of the world is "America First," not just as a slogan, but as a policy which specifically seeks to advance America's interests unilaterally at the expense of everyone else.
In particular, that involves creating economic arrangements which strictly favour the United States, regardless of the considerations of others. For Trump, this has also meant stripping out human rights, moral causes and value sentiments from US diplomacy. They are all for intents and purposes, second-tier considerations, because the main priority is as the National Security Strategy points out, to secure American dominance and competitiveness, especially by gaining strategic control over critical economic resources.
In doing so, the President is willing to deal with effectively anyone, provided, of course, they are willing to cooperate (and if not they are subject to violent regime change). As I have pointed out many times, this actually creates some favourable conditions for China, as the president has effectively discarded the spectrum of US-China "moral" issues in favour of an economic and trade-centric relationship. The administration is willing to give political trade-offs in exchange for economic benefits.
Thus, that Myanmar might be added to that list is no surprise. Even as it is for intents and purposes a failed-state, it is strategically important. It sits on China's border and has access to the Indian Ocean through the Bay of Bengal. While the US has dedicated itself to isolate the country, China has not done so, and seeks to engage with the regime wherever possible. This has also involved gaining access to its rare earths itself, which as the CFR notes, Beijing has "pressured ethnic militias" in the border areas to "essentially lay down their arms," giving them "even more control of their rare-earth exports," which it then numbers as over six hundred according to the Stimson Centre.
The US subsequently sees this situation as China having access to an exclusive set of critical resources, of which it has locked itself out of. So, what is their idea? To subsequently bring the junta out of isolation to try and get a slice of the pie. Joshua Kurlantzick's CFR piece sees this as extremely unlikely, because even if the US somehow rewards Myanmar's Junta, the underlying reality of the country's situation does not change, it is marred with an ongoing civil war, ethnic conflict and is a "global centre of organised crime." China, unlike the United States, has a border with the country. It can, as noted, impose its own influence there, procure resources and immediately take them home. On the other hand, what can the US do? For many, it might just end up rewarding a terrible situation, and be no strategically better off for it.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | The 'Northern Metropolis' and Hong Kong's reinvention to join the AI race
Comment